Why people cling to their beliefs even when millions disagree

What is it about?

People often hold onto their beliefs on controversial issues--like abortion or vaccination--even when they know that many others disagree. Why do people have this tendency to persist in their views despite widespread disagreement? We propose the Paths to Persistence Model (PPM), which identifies four main reasons: Informational path – People see those who disagree as less informed, biased, or intelligent. Ontological path – People view the issue as subjective or impossible to truly know. Functional path – People fear that changing their mind could have negative personal or social consequences. Computational path – People may not put in the mental effort needed to reconsider their beliefs. In a large study of U.S. adults on 96 controversial topics, most participants stuck to their beliefs, even after realizing they had underestimated how many people disagreed with them. The four paths helped explain who persisted and were also linked to broader social outcomes, like willingness to be friends with people who hold opposing views.

Featured Image

Photo by Clay Banks on Unsplash

Photo by Clay Banks on Unsplash

Why is it important?

The field previously focused on informational interventions for changing beliefs, while our model introduces a broader set of reasons to consider. The fact that there are multiple reasons for persistence makes it hard to reach sweeping generalizations about people who do not change their beliefs (e.g., labeling them cognitively rigid, etc.).

Perspectives